Does tetris get easier with a wider field? For the moment, let's assume that side-to-side motion is not a concern in having time to reach the edges. My intuition is that it does, in that the chances of a mismatch between the present pieces and the one being placed would be lower if one has room to have more variety in landing spots (intentionally or not). The difficulty of clearing lines to rectify past mistakes may take longer, but I can't think of a reason why it would be more difficult. The game should presumably become much easier with a wider field (although it may be more tedious as well, and losing challenge in tetris may make it a less interesting game. What could we do about that initial placement issue? Part of the joy of tetris, beyond the long-term strategy in placing blocks when one must comprimise, is maneuvering the blocks to the desired position (and possibly how that difficulty/impossibility changes the choice of placement we make). If we were to imagine the field being wider enough, the drop time would need to be rebalanced (or made less of a factor) to keep the game fun, but if we used the naïve solution of simply reducing the drop time to something negligible, half the game goes away and it becomes solely a placement challenge. If we make it a linear reduction in drop time, we enhance the degree to which placement in the middle is favoured over the sides. This may be a reasonable solution in that it enhances an existing quirk of the game, but it does change what in most game speeds what was a minor issue into a major one, as the centre would become favoured enough that it would be a universal strategy to place s-blocks surrounding a 4-score slot in the centre, with L-blocks beyond and laid-out lines and squares at the edges. Universal strategies tend to ruin games. One alternative idea is to "split" larger fields into "screenlets" where, although they're continuous and pieces move and complete freely across them, people would choose which screenlet the next block (assume a preview pane) would drop from the top-centre of. They could presumably do this with another part of the keyboard while still placing their current pace - the added complication should usually be mild but may introduce another welcome challenge/complexity.
(above is based partly on a conversation with Eric)
An additional issue is that with a wider screen, the damage one takes from a mistake (a gap) becomes greater - one gap in a line ten blocks wide, when lines take 45 seconds to clear means a lot less than one gap in a line 70 blocks wide when blocks take 2 minutes to clear - it would hurt a lot more. One *might* decide that lines can clear with a missing block, but that would change the game too much (no more 4-scores) and would thus be undesirable. This may be an issue that should just remain unresolved.
I've been wondering if anyone did anything like Tetrinet for Dr. Mario.
It seems to me that, for RPGs, a basically sound framework/engine, while a prerequisite, is less important than a good story. If the engine for Final Fantasy 6, Chrono Trigger, or Final Fantasy Tactics were free/open and there were a community that made available content on a continual basis for those games, I would be happily diverted for many years with those games if the content were good. I wouldn't say that continued development on engines is unimportant, but rather that it doesn't matter as much (and honestly, the move to 3d movie-like RPGs irked me to the point that I don't play more modern RPGs).
I've had daydreams of rivers made of ammonia, walking over a barren landscape, entirely scraped free of life, or so it looks. It seems that in these daydreams, I have something with me where any question I ask is answered - I asked why the river was as it is, and heard that this far out, they hadn't yet made it water, as nobody really comes there. This may be a mix of badly remembered bits of CS Lewis, the Thirteenth Floor, and thoughts about the surface of other planets?
I've been wondering, thinking in terms of the rare occasions people of Abrahamic faiths need to care for children they don't want to convert, or possibly rarer occasions where joint services are desired (without entering realms of collective heresy or vagueness inherent in a theoretically completely ecumenical service), if there exist prepared services (and possibly people trained particularly for these things) for generic Abrahamic services (see also Noahide laws and their affiliated movements). Would it be digging too close to betraying one's faith to lead or participate in worship that generic? (At the very least, the monotheism of Christianity is debatable)
I've had fewer migraines recently (maybe one every two weeks) and they've all been pretty mild - I'm not sure why. On one hand, I'm probably not going to talk to the neurologist again until I can properly test the migraine medicines he gave me (and there may be an awkwardly long gap), but on the other hand that's not really something to complain about.